-North Korea tests nuke
-Obama gives speech saying he’s outraged, then goes golfing
-North Korea fires two missiles
-Obama’s UN Ambassador, Susan Rice (the same woman that the 911 Commission says turned down Sudan’s offer to hand over Osama Bin Laden) goes on Today Show and says UN is going to meet, threatens more UN sanctions on the already fully isolated country
-UN meets, doesn’t pass new sanctions, does send “stern letter”
-North Korea responds by test firing another anti-ship missile
-Obama Press Secretary is pressed by ABC News Jake Tapper to explain what Obama’s next attempt will be, Gibbs dodges (clearly had no idea & Admin is fully stumped)
-Russia goes on military alert concerned there could be nuclear war
-North Korea responds by announcing it is no longer bound by the 50+ yr old cease-fire/armistice, and that it will take action.
-North Korea also restarts its shut down nuclear facilities
-North Korea then declares it will attack US and/or South Korean ships
...................................
North Korea warned Wednesday that any attempt to stop, board or inspect its ships would constitute a “grave violation.”
snip
Oh No,no,no OMG no :
On Wednesday, the regime promised “unimaginable and merciless punishment” for anyone daring to challenge its ships.

Obama has taken the bold step of having the America Surrenders Unconditionally text loaded into his teleprompter.

NJCardFan

05-28-2009, 12:54 PM

Back during the campaign, Joe Biden said that Obama is going to be tested right away. How right he was. The good news is that everyone is getting a first hand look on how diplomacy works with a mental midget like Il. It doesn't work. The UN shows it has no backbone. Now everyone knows that Obama doesn't have the backbone so far. As usual, Democrats will sit by and wait for something to happen first then wait some more.

nero

05-29-2009, 10:04 AM

Back during the campaign, Joe Biden said that Obama is going to be tested right away. How right he was. The good news is that everyone is getting a first hand look on how diplomacy works with a mental midget like Il. It doesn't work. The UN shows it has no backbone. Now everyone knows that Obama doesn't have the backbone so far. As usual, Democrats will sit by and wait for something to happen first then wait some more.

Under Clinton NK didn't enrich any plutonium, it was halted for 8 years through diplomacy. When Bush took office he threw diplomacy out the window and enrichment began again. Now NK has many bombs, all created under Bush's watch.

For that matter, Clinton told the NK's that he would destroy their reactor if they were to start making weapons.

Former US President Bill Clinton has revealed that his administration threatened North Korea with an attack aimed at destroying its nuclear facilities in 1994 unless it agreed to freeze its plans to build nuclear weapons http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2578497.stm

Rockntractor

05-29-2009, 10:29 AM

Under Clinton NK didn't enrich any plutonium, it was halted for 8 years through diplomacy. When Bush took office he threw diplomacy out the window and enrichment began again. Now NK has many bombs, all created under Bush's watch.

For that matter, Clinton told the NK's that he would destroy their reactor if they were to start making weapons.

Former US President Bill Clinton has revealed that his administration threatened North Korea with an attack aimed at destroying its nuclear facilities in 1994 unless it agreed to freeze its plans to build nuclear weapons http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2578497.stm
Watercloset! Is that you?

Jfor

05-29-2009, 11:01 AM

Under Clinton NK didn't enrich any plutonium, it was halted for 8 years through diplomacy. When Bush took office he threw diplomacy out the window and enrichment began again. Now NK has many bombs, all created under Bush's watch.

For that matter, Clinton told the NK's that he would destroy their reactor if they were to start making weapons.

Former US President Bill Clinton has revealed that his administration threatened North Korea with an attack aimed at destroying its nuclear facilities in 1994 unless it agreed to freeze its plans to build nuclear weapons http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2578497.stm

Wow... so you're saying that Clinton was able to keep NK in check by giving them nuclear reactors?

Rebel Yell

05-29-2009, 11:51 AM

Wow... so you're saying that Clinton was able to keep NK in check by giving them nuclear reactors?

It was the Jordan autographed basketball that was the deal maker.

nero

05-29-2009, 11:53 AM

Wow... so you're saying that Clinton was able to keep NK in check by giving them nuclear reactors?

Nope, I am not saying that. I am saying he kept them in line ...and didn't have to give them ANY REACTORS.

Jfor

05-29-2009, 12:02 PM

Nope, I am not saying that. I am saying he kept them in line ...and didn't have to give them ANY REACTORS.

Actually he did have to give them reactors to keep them from developing their own. He did just enough to keep them content until he got out of office. When Bush told the North Koreans to pound sand is when shit started.

nero

05-29-2009, 12:04 PM

Actually he did have to give them reactors to keep them from developing their own. He did just enough to keep them content until he got out of office. When Bush told the North Koreans to pound sand is when shit started.

Second, the FASlink you provided is from 1996, before the deal fell apart. If you were informed on the issue you would know that NO reactors were delivered.

Sorry, nice try.

Jfor

05-29-2009, 12:53 PM

Still makes no difference to me. They promised to give reactors to North Korea. Apparently appeasement doesn't work.

nero

05-29-2009, 12:57 PM

Still makes no difference to me. They promised to give reactors to North Korea. Apparently appeasement doesn't work.

Bush also made the same promise, with less restrictions than Clinton

Sonnabend

05-29-2009, 08:56 PM

Bush also made the same promise, with less restrictions than Clinton

PRESIDENT Bush was a real man, unlike that snivelling coward in the Oval.

http://neveryetmelted.com/wp-images/ObamaChamberlain2.jpg

blueyonder

05-29-2009, 10:19 PM

First off, Newsmax is lying.

Second, the FASlink you provided is from 1996, before the deal fell apart. If you were informed on the issue you would know that NO reactors were delivered.

Sorry, nice try.

Are you saying Newsmax lies or that because it does not agree with your view you are putting out they are lying?

nero

05-29-2009, 10:21 PM

Are you saying Newsmax lies or that because it does not agree with your view you are putting out they are lying?

It's a well known fact of history that the reactors were never delivered. It's not a matter of opinion, it's written history. The deal fell apart after Bush took office. We are all aware of this...well, almost all of us.

Newsmax posted a lie, simply put.

blueyonder

05-29-2009, 10:31 PM

It's a well known fact of history that the reactors were never delivered. It's not a matter of opinion, it's written history. The deal fell apart after Bush took office. We are all aware of this...well, almost all of us.

Albright said White House chief of staff Andrew Card was wrong when he claimed on Sunday that Pyongyang had acquired nuclear weapons during the Clinton administration.

“What we did during our watch was to freeze the nuclear program,” she told Alan Colmes. “And I think intelligence un-skewed has shown that it is in the last three years that this nuclear capability of North Korea has emerged.”

Last September, however, Albright admitted that North Korea had duped the Clinton administration, and that Kim Jong Il began to acquire nuclear weapons on her watch.

“What they were doing, as it turns out, they were cheating,” she told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

RECAP:

* Albright admits that the Clinton administration in which she served gave lunatic dictator, and brutal oppressor of his own people, Kim Jong Il, the facilities with which to make nuclear bombs.

* Albright admits that the Clinton administration was so dumb it got duped by Kim Jong Il—that is, that having been dumb enough to trust this brutal dictator with the facilities to make nuclear weapons, they were fooled into thinking he would not do so.

* Albright then blames GWB for Kim Jong Il’s use of those facilities to make nukes.

If the only people left in the Democrat party are those who are willing to buy arguments like this, the average IQ of that party will inevitably drop.

Checkmate!

nero

05-29-2009, 10:34 PM

Nowhere on that link does it say the reactors were delivered.

Your link does not claim the reactors were delivered.

WTF ? ...Show me where it says the reactors were delivered ?

Sonnabend

05-29-2009, 10:35 PM

Hey, Ahenobarbus, read the post again

nero

05-29-2009, 10:38 PM

Hey, Ahenobarbus, read the post again

I did.

Post the text where it says the reactors were delivered...is that so hard ?

Jeeesh, you need to read the post.

blueyonder

05-29-2009, 10:48 PM

Nowhere on that link does it say the reactors were delivered.

Your link does not claim the reactors were delivered.

WTF ? ...Show me where it says the reactors were delivered ?

Potty mouth...time for soap! Chill out and keep it clean. So you are new to CU. Lots of post for your first day out. I am up to your challenges...it's kind of fun

Oh and here
http://www.prisonplanet.com/north-koreas-nukes-paid-for-by-the-us-government.html
Both the Clinton and Bush administrations played a key role in helping Kim Jong-Il develop North Korea’s nuclear prowess from the mid 1990’s onwards.

The hypocrisy being spewed forth from all sides in reaction to today’s news that North Korea tested an underground nuclear device equivalent to 10 times the power of their first test in October 2006 is akin to when the U.S. cited Iraq’s possession of chemical and biological weapons as a reason to invade in 2003, having first checked the receipt of course, since it was Donald Rumsfeld who brokered the deal to supply Saddam with those weapons in the first place.

Rumsfeld was also the man who presided over a $200 million dollar contract to deliver equipment and services to build two light water reactor stations in North Korea in January 2000 when he was an executive director of ABB (Asea Brown Boveri). Wolfram Eberhardt, a spokesman for ABB confirmed that Rumsfeld was at nearly all the board meetings during his involvement with the company.

nero

05-29-2009, 10:54 PM

OMG.

Listen up buddy. I am going to quote from your own link...OK ?

In April 2002, the Bush administration announced that it would release $95 million of American taxpayer’s dollars to begin construction of the ‘harmless’ light water reactors in North Korea. Bush argued that arming the megalomaniac dictator Kim Jong-Il with the potential to produce a hundred nukes a year was, “vital to the national security interests of the United States.” Bush released even more money in January 2003, as was reported by Bloomberg News.

Bush released the funds despite the startling revelation, reported by South Korean newspapers, that a North Korean missile warhead had been found in Alaska.

Construction of the reactors was eventually suspended

It seems the people on this site are around 5 or 6 years old. Oh the irony of you posting a link that backs up MY claim ...yet you still can't see it.

Unreal.

blueyonder

05-29-2009, 11:07 PM

Your post #11 Says No reactors were delivered. Score +1 for Clinton.

I just pointed out to you where it happened in 2000 and you ignore that and go off on how I am making your points. I read the article. My point "BUDDY" is that it happened under Clinton then into Bush. You are ignoring the Clinton part. Put I am the 5 year old? So you get all pissy and call names . I take it you are not one to have a civil conversation, you just get all fluster went people do not see it your way 100%. Sorry to hear that. Makes you the loser!
I am now moving to a different bar seat so to speak.

nero

05-29-2009, 11:13 PM

Your post #11 Says No reactors were delivered. Score +1 for Clinton.

I just pointed out to you where it happened in 2000 and you ignore that and go off on how I am making your points. I read the article. My point "BUDDY" is that it happened under Clinton then into Bush. You are ignoring the Clinton part. Put I am the 5th grader? So you get all pissy and call names . I take it you are not one to have a civil conversation, you just get all fluster went people do not see it your way 100%. Sorry to hear that. Makes you the loser!
I am now moving to a different bar seat so to speak.

Your link says the deal was cancelled.

Get it ? ...Your link says the deal was cancelled. It never happened. They reactors were never delivered. You link says that.